Garret: I tink you bring up an interesting point, we live in a very colorful world, with the technology to make it more widely used, I wonder what other tings you think have changed propaganda in the past 50 years

Eric - I think that today, the propaganda is all more risky. The images are more controversial, the tag lines are more shocking; it's all more out there. Back then, they didn't need shock to get attention.

I think it was interesting how the propaganda of today is more humor based than the propaganda of the past. In the past the propaganda is more serious where as the propaganda of today uses scarasm and humor to get their point accross.

My thoughts on propaganda today- the government has been less open to the public about sharing facts about the war- less informational. The World War II propaganda was more graphic (as stated by Christians class). It seemed as though the government had nothing to hide in that era.

Eric: I think that one main difference is that the colors that were used in WWII were more deep and almost to descriptive. However, in modern propaganda the colors seem to be a little more dull, and they represent their product well.

Class: Why would a company make propaganda for a specific age group, for example everyone uses soap so why would a company present it to only one category of people?

Today, the world has changed into a place where extremes are used to solicit attention. Advertising companies use extremes to draw attention to their products. Those extremes can be provocative photos, emotional triggers or many other things. It is frightening to think of how extreme advertisers will take it to make money.

I think that propaganda has become more uplifting. Like the Army Strong commercials are meant to encourage people to go into the army by making them think it will make them stronger. In wars past the propagnada was more to cause people to have fear. To fight because they don't want to have the enemy take over.

Anna- I think that the propaganda back then was more graphic because of WWII mainly. During the war, they had many posters that convinced people to save scraps or buy war bonds. When they added more graphic details into the posters, it created a sense of fear towards the enemy. If they didn't do what the posters were suggesting, then it implied in a way that we may loose the war.

Anna: I would argue that it is not more graphic. Back then, the only source of what was going on in the war was the media that did not often give out information, today we can often get footage of exactly what is going on, and this is used as a form of propaganda. The real footage is much more graphic than the footage that you might find on the older war posters.

Propaganda was used during WW II to encourage people to take part in rationing and conservation. It was also used to scare people into "doing their part." Today propaganda is more used to show nationalism instead of encouraging people to take part in something.

Shannon: I think a company would target a certain age group because that company knows that that age group will buy their product. If you knew that teenagers would buy your product and that you would make money, would that not drive you to target a certain type of person? I think that propaganda used by companies is different however, because they are instilling excitement in you whereas propaganda used in the news is used to instill fear in you.

Shannon- Because there are certain age groups that are more attracted to certain products. For example, a record store might have music for people of all ages, but teenagers are more focused to music, so they carry music that is targeted more at that age group, and they carry that over into advertising.

Shannon- I think that younger people are more receptive to propaganda then older people. The younger generations are just forming thier opinions on their world and what is included. Whereas most older citizens already have their opinions.

Shannon- first, are you saying that modern products are more dull than older products? Second, I think that companies have a difficult battle to fight if they are trying to target everyone with the same peice of propaganda, it is much easier and more directly effective to appeal to one specific group, that way they know who their customers are and they know they can rely on them.

We also seem to choose a certain race or even a person, like a president, to blame things on. This changes over time but all this propaganda and political cartoons are directed towards them. Back then, it was Hitler or the Jews and moving toward today, especially in the U.S, we blame things on Obama.

Justin: Don't you think that society should be like that? I mean what could propaganda tell us to be a part of today? Yes, there is a war going on but as you have seen that isn't always the center focus so then that makes me wonder, why? War was a huge deal in WWII so what is different about now?

Shannon: A reason a company might target a specific group of people is if they already have customers in other groups and they are looking for more. For example, adults all know the importance of soap and use it, while little kids might not think of it as being so important. Therefore, a soap company might assume adults will buy from them either way and only market to children.

Daniel- again, I would argue that it is not as harsh, today we are constantly streamed propaganda from all sides and we tink nothing of it because it is the standard. We are used to being fed propaganda, and although the propaganda is not as directly in your face there, it was a time of war, and the difference is quantity, not quality.

Shannon: Back in world war 2 war was a huge thing. There hadn't been very many wars before that and it captured the imagination of millions. Today not everyone likes the prospect of war and since there are so many things going on in our own country that need our attention the war isn't always the most important subject.

One of the things they are talking about is the government instilling fear in the people in times of war. Does the government take advantage of war to get the people scared and make them trust the government more. This is what Hitler did and that's how he rose to power.

Kara: Interesting viewpoint, I am sure you could make a compelling argument in favor of this idea, but if you say hope is propaganda then it is only one step from that to love, and hatred and fear. I would say that these are all TOOLS of propaganda, and not propaganda itself.

Eric: Ok, so referring to your first question, propaganda has become more "sugar coated". Kids are more able to relate to it, and they understand it. During WW2, propaganda was harsh and it sent out racist messages. Now, the jokes and messages behind propaganda are more hidden within the text rather than screaming at you.

Margot: I agree with all of those methods that are used. I think that a good example of a harsh marketing technique id the advertising that is directed to teenage girls. They play on the emotions of girls and bring out that want to be loved. Do you think that the government should alow these advertisements? They might do as much harm as cyber bullying.

Shannon: I think that war is changing and war propaganda is not as present in today's society. There is a sneakiness about war today that may be keeping government from promoting war as they have in the past.

Eric: well no, I am not saying that all propaganda is dull, I am just saying they look at color more consciously, and make sure that the right color fits the right product. For example, spa or massage commercials are not done in red or bright pink it is more like an olive green which is a soothing color. Also, don't you think it would be beneficial to appeal to all age groups. Wouldn't this attract more people's attention which could give you more sales.

Kara- There could be two sides to your question. The positive side of propaganda could be used to convince citizens that there is "a light at the end of the tunnel"- so to speak. Such as presidential propaganda. The other side is that certain propaganda could be used to frighten people into thinking a certain way. One could then live in fear where no hope exists.

Kristen: I think that is a huge debate these days. Is it the marketing that causes low self esteem in teens or the way that it is recieved? Can low self esteem be prevented by restricting promotions of perfection, or is the problem caused on the recieving end?

Shannon: I would agree that colors are used more manipulativley (if that is your point). I think that as for trying to appeal to a huge group, they could gain more customers through trying to appeal to everyone, but it is much more difficult and if they start with a very narrow group and then use a single method to broaden your appeal you will eventually gain more customers and not have the near impossible task of trying to appeal to everyone at the same time.

Kara: No I don't really think that hope is propaganda. I think hope can become propaganda. As an example everyone HOPE's that Haiti can get all the resorces they need so now there are commercials and signs about helping Haiti. However, in many cases hope does not. I mean everyone has something they hope for although not a lot of it becomes public propaganda.

The guilt factor is very real and it's not just the government. Companies use it also, making people feel bad about not having something. They make you feel inadequate if you dont wear this perfume or wear these clothes.

Class- Has anyone seen the Saint Jude's research commercials? They use celebrities to endorse donating money for research on diseases and cancer. They also show sick kids on the commercials. Do you think that using celebrities to endorse this commercial is a postive example of propaganda?

Eric: i think it is the fact of getting people to think about what they see. if it is not appealing to the eyeor a catchy lingo. think about it. when you are driving down the highway or watching TV, you remember the ones with the bright abnoctious colors or the ones that have a little gingle. same with propaganda.

Eric: I don't think that one technique is the most effective. Just as Zach said within even companies different techniques can be just as effective. It depends a ton on what product the propaganda applies to.

Eric: It doesn't always appeal to people. Sometimes it guilts them into it and other times it makes them so afraid that they do it. When they are trying to appeal to a person they will either try the method of you are worth it or the method that it will enhance your life.

Taylor: I absolutely think that celebrities enhance the commercial. Because you see the familiar celebrity face you become interested in the commercial. Then you notice the sick child which makes you interested in helping. Long story short, yes those commercials are extremly effextive.

Taylor- I believe that celebrities in our society are used as role models for all ages. I think it is a positive example for people to see someone they look up to- in a way-to be seen as helpping people in need.

Taylor: I do think that they use a more positive approach. I mean there are many ways to go with a commercial for a hospital, they could have used sicker kids and went negatively with that. Instead they were filming the children with smiles and their faces. Also the energizer bunny commercial deals with St.Jude's I think, and they should how their batteries don't only power a toy, but a smile.